As usual, a
transcript of the presentation for those that cannot (or choose not) to view
the presentation is below –

Historically, the reality has been that no
matter if it’s a normal family trust or some form of testamentary trust,
there's been a general acceptance that the Family Court could attack the assets
of that trust in particular circumstances.

However, if it was structured appropriately,
and care was taken in terms of how the trust structure was setup, then the
assets of a trust would generally be quarantined. The concern in recent times has been the decision
of Spry, which received a lot of media
attention.

That decision seemed to create the
impression, on the face of it, that no matter what form of structure was setup
- family trust or testamentary trust - and no matter how that was crafted in
terms of the control structure of the arrangement, the assets of the trust
would always be completely exposed. So, obviously a decision that created a
radical change in terms of the way people approach setting up trust structures.